search_ebay_vinyl

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden. It clearly indicates a read-only search operation and states what is returned, which is useful. However, it does not disclose pagination behavior, result limits, authorization expectations, rate-limit considerations, or the fact that results are limited to eBay's marketplace context.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The single sentence is concise and front-loaded, but it is too under-specified for a tool with 13 parameters and no schema descriptions. It earns its place but is not appropriately sized for the complexity of the input surface.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given 13 parameters, no schema descriptions, no annotations, and no output schema, this one-sentence description is far from complete. It omits filter semantics, sorting behavior, defaults, pagination, and output structure. It only establishes the core purpose and result fields, leaving significant gaps for correct invocation.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0%, and the description adds no parameter meaning. None of the 13 parameters—sort, limit, offset, currency, minPrice, maxPrice, condition, buyingOption, sellerCountry, deliveryCountry, etc.—are explained, so an agent must guess their semantics from names and enums.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states a specific action ('Search active eBay vinyl listings') and lists concrete returned data: prices, sellers, condition, location, and shipping. This distinguishes it from siblings like get_ebay_item, which retrieves a single listing, and search_database, which is a Discogs-oriented search.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance is provided. The description does not mention alternatives such as get_ebay_item for single-item lookups or search_database for non-eBay searches, nor does it explain conditions that would make a user choose one sibling over this tool.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.